Marriage equality advocates like Carlos Guillermo Smith of Equality Florida called the bill “totally unnecessary" and "motivated by a disapproval of same-sex couples.”

According to the wire service, hours were spent debating the bill. “We had to go through this divisive exercise in political posturing that was a giant waste of time,” Smith told AP.

Republicans claimed they sought to alleviate fears among religious leaders who were afraid "societal changes could force them to marry gay couples against their religious beliefs," the wire service reported.

Democratic lawmakers "questioned the motivations behind the measure, saying clergy already can choose not to marry any couple, gay or not," according to the AP. Since the bill did not add any new protections, some argued it was meant to make a political statement against marriage equality.

"Finally, the First Amendment ensures that religions, those who adhere to religious doctrines, and others have protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths," he wrote.

For example, though some sects of the Episcopal Church support same-sex marriage, "clergy members remain free to decline to perform marriages they oppose," The Advocate previously reported.